Jagdeo Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27815 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -62 Year- 2006 Thana -AURAI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Jagdeo Ram S/o Late Janak Ram, R/o Village- Kalyanpur, P.S- Aurai, District Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mukteshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-03-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner being husband of the victim while languishing in custody since 24.1.2014, has renewed his prayer for bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accusation is of killing the daughter of the informant after four years of marriage since the victim objected the illicit relation of the petitioner with Ranju Devi, the brother's wife of the petitioner as a result this petitioner assaulted the victim with brick and stick resulting into her death and subsequently disposed of the dead body.

The Report of the learned trial court dated 16.3.2017 at Flag- A suggests that though two applications have been filed for

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27815 of 2016 (3) dt.29-03-2017 2/2 recall of the witnesses on behalf of the accused persons but the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of four months since out of 12 witnesses 7 have already been examined. Considering the advance stage of the trial, this court is not inclined to revise the earlier order. The prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected in connection with S.T. No. 672 of 2014 arising out of Aurai P.S. Case No. 62 of 2006 pending in the court of learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within eight months. (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Anil/- U T